Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />APRIL 13, 1995 <br />standard. <br />Garske asked if cul -de -sacs would be placed when <br />reconstruction occurs, or if the City would just <br />upgrade the streets to their end. <br />The City Planner assumed if the cul -de -sac issue had <br />not come up now, it would have when the streets are <br />reconstructed. <br />Morelan stated that it is his impression that some <br />people feel the City owes Mr. Tima a lot split. <br />Morelan stated that he had no problem with the split if <br />a way is found to do it. Morelan pointed out that Mr. <br />Tima currently has one lot, has a home on it, and is <br />utilizing his property. As the situation sits, he has <br />an undividable lot. The City would have to grant some <br />sort of variance in order to proceed with a property <br />division. <br />Anne Judd pointed out that the variance is only <br />necessary because the property does not front on an <br />improved street. There is more than enough land area <br />to divide two lots from the Tima property. <br />Steve Garske pointed out that there is enough room at <br />the end of Bluwood for a standard cul -de -sac. Garske <br />suggested that the City can approve one new lot for Mr. <br />Tima, with access from Bluwood. No variance would be <br />required. <br />The City Planner replied that this was correct. The <br />Time home could be split off from the remainder of the <br />property and one new buildable lot created. <br />Keis pointed out that the City would have to disapprove <br />this proposal and tell Mr. Tima to come back with <br />another. <br />Garske pointed out that this would give Mr. Time the <br />opportunity to split his property. <br />Judd noted that the issue of Australian Avenue would <br />not be resolved. <br />Kajalski stated if only one lot is allowed, the <br />Magnuson's and Tima's would not give any property for <br />right -of -way. Kajalski indicated that the improvement <br />6 <br />Page 31 <br />